Industrial Policy in Asia

This paper examines three types of industrialization that have occurred in East Asia: the Japanese, Chinese and generic Asian models. Industrial policies in Japan and the Republic of Korea (ROK) initially protected local companies from foreign investors by imposing high tariffs on foreign investors. But Japan began introducing liberalization policies to attract foreign direct investment (FDI) in the 1960s, and the ROK began to welcome foreign technology in the 1970s. Meanwhile, the governments of the ASEAN countries and Taiwan established export-processing zones (EPZ) to invite FDI by offering preferential treatment, such as tax deductions and exemptions. China adopted similar industrial policies and also established EPZs, attracting the capital and know-how of multinationals and thereby strengthening the international competitiveness of local enterprises. This paper reaches the following three conclusions. First, it would have been difficult for East Asian countries to grow without FDI. Second, central governments were a crucial factor in these countries' growth strategies. Third, EPZs offering preferential treatment can effectively enhance aggregate growth in developing countries, and the Asian experience shows that this strategy can be applied to other countries that satisfy certain preconditions.

Foreign Direct Investment Relations between Myanmar and ASEAN

Myanmar highly appreciates foreign direct investment (FDI) as a key solution reducing the development gap with leading ASEAN countries. Accordingly, it is welcomed by the government. Myanmar's Foreign Investment Law was enacted in 1988 soon after the adoption of a market-oriented economic system to boost the flow of FDI into the country. Foreign investors positively responded to these measures in the early years and FDI inflow into Myanmar gradually increased during the period from 1989 to 1996. However, after 1997, FDI inflow was dramatically reduced and markedly declined until 2004. In 2005, FDI inflow increased at an unprecedented rate and reached the highest level in the country's history. However, this growth was not sustainable in the subsequent years, as it declined again and turned stagnant at the previous level. In terms of source regions, ASEAN is a major investor in Myanmar, which investment is significantly exceeds the combined investment of other regions of the world. Among top ten countries, Thailand's investment alone is significantly more than combined total investments of the other nine countries. Next to Thailand in terms of investments in Myanmar are Singapore and Malaysia among ASEAN, at second and third places, respectively. The combined total FDI inflows into the power and oil and gas sector represent about 65 percent of the total investment. There are many opportunities for foreign investment in other sectors, which are not, yet exploited. ASEAN countries will certainly be source countries of Myanmar FDI in the future, and Myanmar should expand to other Asian countries like Japan, India, China, Korea, and Hong Kong where its FDI portfolio is concerned. To effectively attract FDI into the country, Myanmar needs to minimize the effect of policy while opening and encouraging other potential sectors of FDI to foreign investors in ASEAN and Asian countries.

Industrialization in Indonesia since the 1970s

Introduction: During the period from the latter half of the 1980s until just before the Asian currency crisis in 1997, Indonesia’s economic development had drawn expectations and attention from various quarters, along with Malaysia and Thailand within the same Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). In fact, the 1993 report by the World Bank, entitled “East Asian Miracle: Economic Growth and Public Policy,” recognized Indonesia as one of the East Asian economies with the strong economic performance, i.e. sustained economic growth (World Bank [1993]). And it was the manufacturing industry that had been the driving force behind Indonesia’s economic growth during that period. Since the 1997 outbreak of the Asian currency crisis, however, the manufacturing sector in Indonesia has been mired in a situation that rules out the kind of bright prospects it had emanated previously. The Indonesian economy is still in the developing stage, and in accordance with the history of industrial structural changes in other countries, Indonesia’s manufacturing industry can still be expected to serve as the engine of the country’s economic development. But is it really possible in an environment where economic liberalization and globalization are forging ahead? And, what sort of problems have to be dealt with to make it possible? To answer these questions, it is necessary to know the current conditions of Indonesia’s manufacturing sector, and to do that, it becomes important to think back on the history of the country’s industrialization. Thus, this paper is intended to retrace and unlock the track of Indonesia’s industrialization up until the establishment of the manufacturing sector in its present form, with the ultimate goal being to give answers to the above-mentioned questions. Subject to an analysis in this paper is the period from the installment of President Soeharto’s administration onward when industrialization of the modern industrial sector2 moved into high gear. 　　　The composition of this paper is outlined below. Section 1 first shows why it is important to examine import substitution and export orientation, both of which are used as the measures of the analysis in this paper, in tracking the history of the industrialization, and then discuss indicators of import substitution and export orientation as well as statistical data and resources needed to develop those indicators. Section 2 clarifies the status of the manufacturing industry among all industries by looking at the composition ratio of the manufacturing industry in terms of value added, imports and exports. Section 3 to 5 cover three periods between 1971 and 1995 and make an analysis of import substitution, export orientation and changes in the industrial structure for each period. Section 3 analyzes the period from 1971 through 1985, when Indonesia pursued the import substitution policy amid the oil boom. Section 4 covers the period from 1985 through 1990, when the packages of deregulatory measures were announced successively under structural adjustment policies made necessary by the fall in oil prices. Section 5 examines the period from 1990 through 1995, which saw the alternate shifts between the overheating of the economy by sharply rising investment by both domestic and foreign investors in the wake of the liberalization of investment, trade and financial services, and polices to cool down the economy. Section 6, which covers the 1995-1999 period straddling the economic crisis, is designed for an analysis of the changes in production trends before and after the economic crisis as well as the changes in the industrial structure. Section 7, after summing up the history of Indonesia’s industrialization examined in the previous sections, discusses problems found in respective sectors and attempts to present future prospects for the country’s manufacturing industry.

The role of home and host country characteristics in FDI: firm-level evidence from Japan, Korea and Taiwan

There is a large and growing empirical literature that investigates the determinants of outward foreign direct investment (FDI). This literature examines primarily the effect of host country characteristics on FDI even though home country characteristics also influence the decision of firms to invest abroad. In this paper, we examine the role of both host and home country characteristics in FDI. To do so, we constructed a firm-level database of outward FDI from Japan, Korea, and Taiwan. Our empirical analysis yields two main findings. First, host countries with better environment for FDI, in terms of larger market size, smaller fixed entry costs, and lower wages, attract more foreign investors. Second, firms from home countries with higher wages are more likely to invest abroad. An interesting and significant policy implication of our empirical evidence is that policymakers seeking to promote FDI inflows should prioritize countries with higher wages.

Chapter 3 Industrial Location in Cambodia: Industrial Policies and Economic Statistics

Cambodia has experienced high economic growth in the last decade. Because most of its industries were destroyed during the Pol Pot regime and civil war, in the last 20 years the country has been working hard to liberalize its economy to attract foreign investors With its efforts to join the regional and international community and with changes in the international trade environment, Cambodia started to grow its economy in the late 1990s. Now, in the early 21st century, the Cambodian economy seems to be prepared to take off. We can observe a kind of industrial agglomeration occurring, even though still at a small scale. In this paper, first, I will review the history of Cambodia’s economic development since the late 1980s. Second, I will examine the economic policies, laws, rules, and other environmental factors which have influenced industrial development and industrial location in Cambodia. Third, I will introduce industrial location in the late 2000s. Lastly, I will introduce some statistical data for the future analysis of industrial location in Cambodia.

FDI and investment barriers in developing economies

Does investment liberalization in developing economies affect FDI decisions differently across individual firms? To address this question, we simulate the response of individual firms to reductions in investment costs across developing economies. We explore two policy experiments: elimination of setup-procedure requirements for foreign investors and a reduction in corporate tax rates on foreign-owned multinationals. We find that a relaxing of discriminatory foreign investment procedures induces middle productive firms to increase their entry and production in developing economies substantially, but the most productive firms to expand moderately. Multinationals expand their entry and production in developing economies more substantially following a decline in entry barriers than following a decrease in corporate tax rates.

The impact of foreign firms on industrial productivity : evidence from Japan

With a newly constructed dataset on foreign firms in Japan for the period 1995-2008 from firm-level surveys, this paper estimates the impact of foreign firms on industrial productivity at the regional level. A Bayesian-model averaging approach is taken to account for model uncertainty resulting from various linkages between foreign firms and domestic industries. The results show that the foreign firms may contribute to industrial efficiency directly through their above-average productivity and indirectly through positive spillovers in intra-industry and local backward linkages. Forward linkages with foreign firms may have a negative impact on industrial productivity. However, these impacts depend on the nationality and entry mode of foreign investors. Aggregating foreign firms may mask their distinctive impacts on productivity.